My god... it's just a review!

I think you all need to take a step back for a minute. Stop, breathe through the nose, and exhale out the mouth. And do it slowly.... slowly.... Good. Now let's talk.

I especially want to talk to everyone getting all bent out of shape about the current Halo 4 reviews. Or as I've seen, anyone who doesn't give the game the glowing review they feel it deserves. Now because of this, we actually have people who are calling the very idea of game reviews themselves into question. What I want to know is why now, and why Halo 4?

Look, you're gonna have to get over yourselves. People like different things. What I consider good may not be seen in the same positive point of view as others. Hell, I don't care about the game myself, but why should my opinion matter to you? I don't have to like the same things you do.That's a fact of life. But it doesn't end with one opinion that differs from yours. There's a broad *** **** spectrum of opinions out there. There's that word again, opinion, but we'll get back to that in a second. They're not going to all be the same. And if someone points out significant flaws, they may very well be able to justify a lower score. But that's the key word... IF. Now if they're all, "Halo 4 sucks 'cause I say it sucks..." then yeah. Feel free to disregard them. After all, criticism without validation isn't really worth consideration anyway. But the same can be said about positive praise. It goes both ways.

Lastly, reviews shouldn't be the last word on games. Look at them the way I do. Insightful(sometimes) opinions backed up with examples of why the reviewer liked or disliked the games. The key word is opinion. You don't have to like or dislike the same things they do. Coincidentally, if a reviewer is pretty much spot on with his opinions of games in your eye, then by all means listen to them. But don't jump all over them just because they don't like something you love. And don't jump on a bandwagon just because everybody else does. Just remember, good reviews or bad, in the end YOU'RE buying the game. And no matter what anyone else says, it's you who decides if the game is worth it.

... what, the pic of Jeff? Just adding a bit of sexay to the post. Problem? Explain in a review...

Um, the problem isn't just the score. It isn't just that it's someone's "opinion" (even though they are PAID to give an above-average "opinion", at least we would hope).

It's that reviews seem to deliberately omit problems with a game, and/or they deliberately omit good things about a game, and/or they deliberately judge Game A harshly on a certain aspect when a few months earlier they gave Game B a free pass on the very same thing. You may call it an "opinion", but there is a long and dirty history of these so-called "opinions" being used by journalists to unfairly bash a game, or to inaccurately praise a game. It's why people are getting sick of reviews: there isn't a scrap of integrity. An opinion (a paid opinion, at that) isn't worth a dime if there's no integrity in it, and saying "it's just their opinion" is no excuse.

It's not nitpicking. It's not whining. It's not "letting someone have their own opinion". It's a matter of the journalism in this industry being a crock of **** and gamers would ENJOY being accurately and fairly informed as to the value of a certain game.

Feeling this way shows you're putting to much stock in the review. in truth, you don't have to listen to a d*** thing the reviewer says. If you like the game, play it, and to hell with what they say about it. Stop worrying about what everybody's saying about it.

An opinion is exactly what it is. if you follow it like a religion, you have no one to blame but yourself. I play plenty of games that aren't considered popular. Because I choose to, not because they tell me to. But I also have reviewers whose opinions I do tend to trust.

My advice to you? Stop reading so many reviews, and just play what you want to play. Stop getting so worked up over nothing.

That's the thing: I barely read any reviews, and I don't worry much (if at all) about review scores.

My gripe with reviews is that - if journalists would actually be journalists - reviews could be a useful tool for gamers to use, instead of a useful tool for advertisers to use. I'd LIKE it if I could trust reviews again. Personally, THAT is why I get frustrated by reviews.

@enigmatruth be told. It isnt just now and it isnt just Halo 4. this has been a trend since this 'particular' console generation really got started.

You will have those that thoroughly enjoy games and will review them based on particular merits. But what we have been seeing is an ever growing population of reviewers that specifically target high profile games to simply try and ruin them.

It happened with uncharted, GTA, GT5, Forza, Gears, GoW...the list goes on. Its as if those who seek nothing more than to try and ruin it for others have nothing better to do. Is it spite? Is it jealousy? Is it because they just want to to piss others off and get a reaction?

The answer could be an number of things but it happens. I have always said reviews are opinions which is only partially right. There is an opinionated tone that takes shape during a review but the general nature of a 'game' review is to review the assets.

Such as sound quality, frame rate, graphics, load times. The things that every gamer will experience when they play the same game. sometime there are comparative involved which really should be left to the end. As is such the "personal" view (or opinion) of the game should also be at the end.

That way the reader is reading the comprehensive portion of the review and can formulate their own conclusion before reading the last part of the reviewers individual POV. That WAS how reviews used to be. Now it became more about pissing off the other guy or giving it so much praise that it sickens the other guy to make them want to write up a negative retort.

That is all we see on this site day in and day out. A post about something being positive shortly followed by a post of why that positive is really a negative. You see the pattern?

Sadly I think you're running off one of the biggest fallacies people have with game reviews. That is to say, people generalize the site as reviewing A and B, but usually overlook who wrote the reviews.

I hardly think it matters if John C says inFamous is an awful open world game with virtually no story and weak combat, then Jimmy Q says Prototype has everything you love in the genre. They both might write for the same site, which means people will just generalize it as "ew IGN gave inFAMOUS a low score, but praised Prototype for the same thing", though it really lacks relevance.

In the end this is just more proof of people fighting for the stupidest ****** ******* things in the world. There is no standardized way of scoring things, but some people act like points should come and go on whims. Take Mass Effect 3, okay the ending sucks... so people act like the game should lose 4+ points for the ending of the game. A scene that is no more than 10 minutes and really is just something you disagree with deserves to knock the game down SEVERAL points? You might think this is silly, but go read the articles back when ME 3 released. The problem is, you have this paradoxical idea of how reviews should be done. Not everyone is going to care as much as you, not everything thinks the same way as you and not everyone thinks Money + Series = 10/10, but thats all these posts ever prove.

You can disagree with the "ill-informed" reviews all you want, but at least do more than complain about what others do. You think they're wrong, list reasons not stupid allegations against a group. You don't like their reviews, vote down the articles on N4G (then they won't appear here anymore). You want it to stop, DON'T GIVE THEM THE TIME OF DAY. God, it's not rocket science.

The mistake most people make is taking just the score and not whats been said about the game. I tend to trust Gametrailers video reviews, more often than not whats been said about the game and the score it gets don't always tally up. They gave Binary Domain a 6.8/10 but learning that the Yakuza creator had a hand in it peaked my interest to go out and buy it. Turns out to be one of the best games i've played this gen, I can see where they were coming from on many points in the review but different people have a higher level of tolerance for certain aspects of games.

What i'm not really understanding in this gen of consoles is the vast gap in scores for releases of certain games and their sequels.

RE5 was generally well received with good scores, then RE6 comes about and gets beaten to death for stepping away from the concept of the original games. Correct me if i'm wrong but didn't RE5 do that first? Its almost like reviewers said 'Capcom...we'll let you get away with this for RE5 because you're Capcom and we love you but don't do it again'. The inevitable sequel comes about and you know what happens next.

Seeing a score for 9/10 for one game then a 4/10 for the sequel which improves on the previous game is suspect at best. As long as you're intelligent enough to find multiple sources crap reviews are easily spotted. Its just a shame that most people give these dodgy reviews undeserved attention by screaming about it on every forum they can find.

I will stop getting annoyed by bad reviews, when 100% gamers make an opinion for themselves and dont care about reviews.

But sadly that wont happen soon enough, so I will continue to get pissed at bad scores on reviews because, there are times I want a game to get a sequel, because for me that game is great, but because of bad reviews it gets crappy sales (people wont be even bothered to try it for themselves), and the publishers will ditch the possibility of continuing the franchise.

Example:

God Hand = Great game => shitty reviews => shitty sales => no sequel.

Shadow of the Damned = Great Game => mediocre reviews => mediocre sales => no publisher wants to touch the franchise => no sequel.

This is true for some things, but I also believe this to be an excuse too. Resident Evil Operation Raccoon City got poor review scores across the board, still sold pretty well all things considered. Orgarhythm scored pretty good scores across the board, Yourgamercard lists only 200 people that played it, which also includes the Japanese version of the game and for a game that got so many high scores... only 13 people are listed as getting all the complete trophies and of this only 6 have the normal mode clear trophy.

While you can certainly make this claim for some titles, plenty of games fail for other reasons. Lack of marketing, poor reviews, lack of interest, but it doesn't start / end with people giving things high or low scores.

I never look at the score. All I do is look at the pros & cons in a game review and decide based on that if I want that game or not. Most of the time the games I do buy are from developers I'm a fan of their work but if it's a game I'm not sure about I look for the following things I just mentioned. People take gaming which is a hobby way too seriously. At the end of the day business comes before pleasure.

I totally agree with you man. I mean it's the same with spidey shattered dimensions. Critics thought of it as average at best and I loved it. Great game, lot of fun. Fuck ign and gs if they didn't like it, I'm buying it, not them.

I just think it's sad when I see people get bent out of shape because of reviews in general, not toward a specific game. Like, it's one thing to disagree, but don't attack someone because their opinion doesn't mirror yours.